rxantos, that's exactly the point of the thought experiment of Schrodinger's cat - to illustrate that it is *not* simply the case that the outcome is unknown until you open the box. It's not an uncertainty principle. It's not that we don't know. It's that both outcomes are real until observed. Which is bizarre, yes, and seems absurd, but the current scientific consensus is that it's accurate.
khpage, Texas Hold'em is not an application of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics deal with microscopic phenomena, and an essential element of the "cat" thought experiment is that it turns on the cat's possible death being a result of the random prospect of the decay of a small amount of a radioactive element. (Thus, it extrapolates from a random event on the microscopic scale to have theoretically-observable impacts which seem rather bizarre to us.)
SchrÃ¶dingers cat could be dead or alive, without airholes the cat is dead. Copenhagen interpretation as the eponymous conference on climate change fuzied the dead certainty of our man made climate disaster with false hope science.
Dilbert might have a box full of Schroedinger's laundry, which was put in there by mistake. The cat is doing nicely, but it isn't certain just where the cat is, at the moment. Best example of Schro's uncertainty principle that I can think of is Texas Hold'em Poker, but since I am neither a mathematician ( I was always good at mathematics until we got to addition and subtraction) nor an engineer (I am however, very much impressed with some of the engineering and design of our modern cars) you folks know a lot more about this stuff than I do.....khp<><